Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Nick (saunders@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Saturday, 11-Nov-2023 04:00:42 JST Nick

   • GrumpyRabbit

   @GrumpyRabbit mmm, not sure that driving is a constitutional right. Which article?

   • Embed this notice
     Nick (saunders@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Saturday, 11-Nov-2023 04:31:45 JST Nick

     in reply to

     • GrumpyRabbit

     @GrumpyRabbit sounds contentious. Notably you've not acknowledged that others might hold a differing understanding.

   • Embed this notice
     GrumpyRabbit (grumpyrabbit@social.teci.world)'s status on Saturday, 11-Nov-2023 04:31:47 JST GrumpyRabbit

     in reply to
     @SAUNDERS Amendments Nine and Ten make it clear that ALL individual rights not explicitly limited (in whatever way) by the EXPLICITLY ENUMERATED authorities by the clauses of the Constitution are rights that the Federal government has no authority to infringe.
     
     Alexander expressly enunciated the same doctrine in Federalist #84, written and published before the Bill of Rights was even written. And the Federalist Papers, collectively, served as the basis by which the several States decided what the governing contract they were being asked to ratify would mean, were they to ratify the proposed Constitution.
   • Embed this notice
     Nick (saunders@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Saturday, 11-Nov-2023 07:59:40 JST Nick

     in reply to

     • GrumpyRabbit

     @GrumpyRabbit I'm not asking for proof. Just color me skeptical when you won't even acknowledge that the opposition will make an argument.

   • Embed this notice
     GrumpyRabbit (grumpyrabbit@social.teci.world)'s status on Saturday, 11-Nov-2023 07:59:41 JST GrumpyRabbit

     in reply to
     @SAUNDERS It's beyond rational dispute. The burden of proof can only rightly rest on whomsoever claims any right or authority to rule over others. For that reason, your request for proof is out of line.
   • Embed this notice
     GrumpyRabbit (grumpyrabbit@social.teci.world)'s status on Saturday, 11-Nov-2023 10:52:29 JST GrumpyRabbit

     in reply to
     @SAUNDERS Of course the opposition will make an argument. I've heard every one of them, and they're absolute GARBAGE. Laughably so.
     
     Read Federalist #84, then research who wrote it, and that person's opinions on the proper authority of the US government under the Constitution, and how the Federalist papers were used to get the Constitution ratified.
     
     After having done that, if you want to make an argument against what I've said is the proper way to interpret the Constitution, then do so. I'll respond to it.